TeemuFoundation Posted April 17, 2020 Share Posted April 17, 2020 I love that it's now actually worth it to fire useless talent, instead of just having a bunch of unhappy workers hanging around for years on end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pat666 Posted April 17, 2020 Share Posted April 17, 2020 I love that it's now actually worth it to fire useless talent, instead of just having a bunch of unhappy workers hanging around for years on end. wouldn't you want to keep all those unhappy guys and not use them just so another company won't sign them? :D:D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-laz- Posted April 17, 2020 Share Posted April 17, 2020 wouldn't you want to keep all those unhappy guys and not use them just so another company won't sign them? :D:D I found Vince McMahon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nerodragomir1 Posted April 17, 2020 Share Posted April 17, 2020 I really like the regional battles alteration. Medium should be a nice buffer zone before moving up to the big leagues. It sounds right because it can give you time to set up your company to move to the big time without needing to worry about any regional battles effecting your companies momentum. Also seems fair for the smaller companies. Instead of being boxed around by a bunch of medium companies that they realistically probably can't box upwards at. I love the contract change too! It made sense that you should have to pay out a contracts full length in terms of being fair & actually honoring a contract. But clearly in the real world. A contract doesn't mean anything because you can just fire people that recently signed 5 year deals & probably only need to pay them a short term payment. The decison to change the "associated storyline" thing was the right move too. I feel like this was one of the more annoying things about 2016. I don't want to feel forced to make someone either be on commentary or do a run in on every squash or match against a lower card guy. Honestly really great changes all in all! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D16NJD16 Posted April 17, 2020 Share Posted April 17, 2020 The journal entries haven't lit my world on fire for many weeks now. Seems like alot of tweaking, sidestepping, and second guessing. Which is okay. I think this was a case where all the good stuff got announced at the onset. Just waiting for a release at this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awesomenessofme1 Posted April 17, 2020 Share Posted April 17, 2020 Wasn't the inclusion of Medium companies in regional battles a change in the first place? That's the equivalent of Cult. Also, question. Is there any way to make a contract so that you can't get a discount for firing them? That was part of Mark Henry's infamous 10-year deal if I remember correctly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tag01 Posted April 17, 2020 Share Posted April 17, 2020 The journal entries haven't lit my world on fire for many weeks now. Seems like alot of tweaking, sidestepping, and second guessing. Which is okay. I think this was a case where all the good stuff got announced at the onset. Just waiting for a release at this point. almost like they're polishing up a finished product shortly before release. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingster Posted April 17, 2020 Share Posted April 17, 2020 So, will achievements still be a thing in 2020? They always helped me setting goals for my save games in 2016. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoredomTM Posted April 17, 2020 Share Posted April 17, 2020 The reason for this change is that the Medium category tends to include a lot of companies who are pretty powerful (for example, in a converted TEW2016 database that would generally include heavy hitters like TCW and PGHW, and in real world mods you'd generally find AEW there) So, in the end, it wasn't SWF or USPW that knocked TCW down to cult, but the game itself and its criteria changing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrokenCycle Posted April 17, 2020 Share Posted April 17, 2020 Seems like alot of tweaking, sidestepping, and second guessing. Which is okay. wat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
combolock Posted April 17, 2020 Share Posted April 17, 2020 6 days Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianc2008 Posted April 17, 2020 Share Posted April 17, 2020 I'm cool with the decision to reduce regional battles to tiny and small companies. It gives them a fighting chance if they can put on good shows. Also, I'm fine with being able to fire people if things don't work out for a company. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jomosensual Posted April 17, 2020 Share Posted April 17, 2020 Reading some entries in the journal again and found this The opinions show what each company thinks about the other, ranging from Extremely Negative to Extremely Positive, with Neutral in the middle. These will change over the course of the game depending on their actions, and impact how they will react to the other company. Opinions are saved even if two companies have no other visible relationship, meaning that the game can "remember" previous acts of friendship or hostility. That's really cool. Looks like raiding companies just for the hell of it will cause some push back now. Is there a way to forge some positive relationships for promotions indirectly, like declaring war on or raiding promotions feuding with another? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Travis Posted April 17, 2020 Share Posted April 17, 2020 Just something I’ve been wondering about. Let’s say you’re a small company and want to do your biggest show ever and you have a spare million bucks to help put it together. Would you even be able to entertain an offer to a big broadcaster that would otherwise not even talk to you in TEW16 if you put down on the negotiations that you’d pay them an absurd amount to air your show? I think the journal just says it’d help you get the better time slot, but it’d be interesting if the money would just get you in if you don’t meet popularity/production requirements. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
landxx Posted April 17, 2020 Share Posted April 17, 2020 Just something I’ve been wondering about. Let’s say you’re a small company and want to do your biggest show ever and you have a spare million bucks to help put it together. Would you even be able to entertain an offer to a big broadcaster that would otherwise not even talk to you in TEW16 if you put down on the negotiations that you’d pay them an absurd amount to air your show? I think the journal just says it’d help you get the better time slot, but it’d be interesting if the money would just get you in if you don’t meet popularity/production requirements. I would love this but i dont think its will be possible in new game ;( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rufas2000 Posted April 17, 2020 Share Posted April 17, 2020 I don't know if it can be changed now or not. If not it isn't a big deal. I think when you release a talent early the player should have to pay a percentage of the remaining salary. By capping it at 6 months its almost a no brainer to offer as many years as possible to outdo other offers. By making it a percentage of remaining salary it makes muiti year deals, especially to aging talent, more of a risk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyretic Posted April 17, 2020 Share Posted April 17, 2020 I don't know if it can be changed now or not. If not it isn't a big deal. I think when you release a talent early the player should have to pay a percentage of the remaining salary. By capping it at 6 months its almost a no brainer to offer as many years as possible to outdo other offers. By making it a percentage of remaining salary it makes muiti year deals, especially to aging talent, more of a risk. That's kind of the issue with games that simulate real life. Clearly things are heavily weighted in favour of the companies IRL. I believe WWE only have to pay out three months instead of the six Adam is using. Do you go for real world accuracy or balance it for gameplay reasons? No matter which way Adam goes with it there will be people who would prefer the other option. Ideally it would be one of the checkboxes in the preferences, but I don't know how easy it would be to make that happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rufas2000 Posted April 17, 2020 Share Posted April 17, 2020 That's kind of the issue with games that simulate real life. Clearly things are heavily weighted in favour of the companies IRL. I believe WWE only have to pay out three months instead of the six Adam is using. Do you go for real world accuracy or balance it for gameplay reasons? No matter which way Adam goes with it there will be people who would prefer the other option. Ideally it would be one of the checkboxes in the preferences, but I don't know how easy it would be to make that happen. Good point. As an aside one thing that WCW did was offer guaranteed contracts that they had to pay even when they went out of business. This was why Hogan, Hall, Nash etc. sat at home before reforming the NWO. If they signed with the WWE before the WCW deal ran out the considerable WCW money went poof. Then again the WWE just released a bunch of mid level talent that thought they had guarantees but apparently not so there's that. Maybe the really famous people could demand guaranteed contracts that worked like the old system (player has to pay the remainder but if they choose to sign somewhere else the player gets the remainder of the money back - probably easier gameplay & coding wise than monthly payments like Turner had to do). I agree real life vs gameplay is an issue. I'd prefer a percentage instead of 6 months (achieves the same effect but adds in longer deals being riskier) but hey if its six months I'll offer longer deals. I adapt to the "world" around me lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJArocho Posted April 18, 2020 Share Posted April 18, 2020 They didn't have WCW money... There was no WCW money left, as it was in the deep red. Hogan, Nash, Hall, and Goldberg had Time Warner money just to sit back, drink a little piña colada and have a bunch of siestas along the shores in Panama City Beach. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt_Black Posted April 18, 2020 Share Posted April 18, 2020 They didn't have WCW money... There was no WCW money left, as it was in the deep red. Hogan, Nash, Hall, and Goldberg had Time Warner money just to sit back, drink a little piña colada and have a bunch of siestas along the shores in Panama City Beach. DDP had one of those too, but he accepted a buy-out, getting a fraction of what he would have gotten had he sat it out, because he truly believed that the WWE vs. WCW that Vince McMahon was planning was going to set the world on fire. It... well, let's not dwell on what happened after that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Historian Posted April 18, 2020 Share Posted April 18, 2020 Good point. As an aside one thing that WCW did was offer guaranteed contracts that they had to pay even when they went out of business. This was why Hogan, Hall, Nash etc. sat at home before reforming the NWO. If they signed with the WWE before the WCW deal ran out the considerable WCW money went poof. Then again the WWE just released a bunch of mid level talent that thought they had guarantees but apparently not so there's that. Maybe the really famous people could demand guaranteed contracts that worked like the old system (player has to pay the remainder but if they choose to sign somewhere else the player gets the remainder of the money back - probably easier gameplay & coding wise than monthly payments like Turner had to do). I agree real life vs gameplay is an issue. I'd prefer a percentage instead of 6 months (achieves the same effect but adds in longer deals being riskier) but hey if its six months I'll offer longer deals. I adapt to the "world" around me lol. I'm going to guess with contracts having been restructured and redone that there is going to be a balance to prevent the longer deals being a work around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Ryland Posted April 18, 2020 Author Share Posted April 18, 2020 By capping it at 6 months its almost a no brainer to offer as many years as possible to outdo other offers. It isn't, because the workers will want significantly more money to sign a very long deal. There's still checks and balances in place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-laz- Posted April 18, 2020 Share Posted April 18, 2020 I don't know if this is too late to suggest things but the ability to ask your development companies to turn someone either heel or face before a call up would be handy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
landxx Posted April 18, 2020 Share Posted April 18, 2020 I don't know if this is too late to suggest things but the ability to ask your development companies to turn someone either heel or face before a call up would be handy I think u can turn them when they are in development Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-laz- Posted April 18, 2020 Share Posted April 18, 2020 I think u can turn them when they are in development Can you, I've never seen that in 2016 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.